The Canucks feel they have addressed some key weaknesses on defence.
PENTICTON, B.C. -- The lasting impression of the Vancouver Canucks' failed 2010 playoff run was a completely flummoxed Daniel Sedin. Channeling his inner Sean Avery, he took game-altering penalties the likes of which we've never seen a Sedin take before.
The rare snapping Swede was born, we can only assume, because he and his Canucks realized they didn’t have the answers -- nor the necessary people in their lineup -- to deal with the Blackhawks onslaught, led down low by Dustin Byfuglien.
The eventual Stanley Cup champions may or not have been more skilled than the Canucks. We can debate that.
But they definitely had more grit, resilience, and playoff savvy. Chicago found a way under the Canucks’ collective skin, and most definitely, Byfuglien's net presence was something the Canucks defence simply couldn’t deal with.
So we’re not ashamed to admit, the new defencemen we expected to see at the Canucks 2011 training camp were guys in the mould of the rugged shot-blocker Anton Volchenkov, or a big Andy Sutton type. Particularly after that first round debacle where every power-play shot the Los Angeles Kings took found the back of the Vancouver net, and the subsequent free agent loss of tough and abrasive blue-liner Willie Mitchell.
Size and physicality, that’s the itch we thought general manager Mike Gillis would try to scratch over the summer. But as usual, he thought outside that box.
"I don't think you can battle Byfuglien with strength -- it's more about being smart," said captain-in-waiting Henrik Sedin, after the first day of Canucks’ Penticton training camp on Saturday. "Hamhuis and Ballard, they’re both smart players."
Indeed, Gillis did well when he landed Dam Hamhuis as an unrestricted free agent and Keith Ballard on a draft-day trade. His defence is now deeper than a Revelstoke gorge with smart puck-movers.
But when the next Dustin Byfuglien comes along, are the Canucks any better equipped to deal with him?
"It feel like we have 6, 7, 8 guys right now who are going to battle for spots," Henrik said. "That's exciting for the forwards, because we know we’re going to get the puck lots. I don’t know if (Hamhuis and Ballard) bring a lot of strength and muscle, but they bring a lot of smarts."
There is no doubt the Canucks will be considered among a small, elite group as Stanley Cup contenders this season. And we’ll have to admit, after years of opining on a franchise’s need to get grittier and tougher — and that franchise annually refusing to do anything of the sort -- perhaps we’re just plain wrong.
Although, to be fair, we’re not ready to be swayed by Vancouver’s success until the Canucks win more than one playoff round in a post-season.
What did Hamhuis think about the Canucks, during his six seasons with the Nashville Predators?
"I had my hands full playing against the Sedins, so I didn’t see a lot of what their defence were doing," he said with a laugh on Saturday.
He lines up here as a shutdown man, a role he’s okay with: "I’ve played a defensive role now the last three or four years of my career, so I've had some experience in that area."
Ballard is a guy who can step up and catch forwards as they enter the zone, a component that could make them a hard team to play against. But there are disconcerting salary problems here, problems that may force a trade or loss on waivers of rare physical defencemen like Shane O'Brien or Kevin Bieksa.
"We kept the core -- I don't think they lost any of the guys they wanted to keep," winger Mikael Samuelsson said of Gillis’ summertime work. "If that works in the end, who knows? We're not winning anything in October or November."
Hamhuis, Samuelsson said, "is a solid D. A really smooth, good skater who always seems to have his head up. A solid defenceman, like all of those Nashville defencemen."
With a torn Achilles tendon, Salo may be out until January. But counting him among the Canucks Top 7 defencemen, Gillis has $23.9 million invested in seven defencemen. Add Luongo's $5.5 million cap hit on to that, and eight players eat up just shy of half of the club’s payroll -- and none are forwards.
They are better on the back end with Hamhuis and Ballard, but this team was never low on puck movers.
Are they tougher, any more difficult to play against, or in any way better equipped for playoff hockey that has tripped them up these past two years?
That, good Canucks fan, is something we're going to have wait a full 82 games to see.
